<p>Hi, I have the luck to choose between those 2 awesome institutions, and wanted your insight on the differences between those 2 institutions.</p>
<p>My description: A math/science nerd, enjoys discussing things like relativity, electrodynamics, analytical mechanics etc... Prospective major: ChemE, EE, physics. Although I might major in engineering, I still would like to study some theoretical subjects of physics (8.012/8.022/8.04/8.033). Love science jokes, want to participate in undergrad research, and enjoys having intellectually stimulating peers. I also plan to do graduate work if possible.</p>
<p>Can you show the plus/minus of each institutions, why I should go to either places? What does MIT have that Stanford does not have? What does Stanford have that MIT does not have?</p>
<p>Assume money financial aid is similar at both places.</p>
<p>Though I didn’t look into either one of these schools, I can give you my most elementary opinion! My really good friend is going to Stanford for a major in math and/or science, and obviously, the programs are outstanding. I’ve heard that at MIT, the focus is much more on the graduate students and their research… I think MIT is probably a much more serious, grueling place, though I think you’d still have fun; I just think that Stanford is probably the best all-around undergraduate experience… I dunno, I’d choose Stanford. You have a tough, but pretty amazing decision to make. Not many have the opportunity to choose! Good luck - you really can’t go wrong with either.</p>
No. At MIT, a student is a student – many classes are joint grad/undergrad classes, and undergrads and grad students do research alongside each other. There is a strong focus on research, but it’s research that professors and postdocs and graduate students and undergrads are doing together.</p>
<p>MIT undergrads aren’t condescended to by pretending they’re special snowflakes around whom the world revolves. They’re expected to learn and contribute the way everyone else at MIT is.</p>
<p>As for the OP, my only direct comparison between MIT and Stanford comes from graduate school interviews. The graduate students at MIT talked about how the undergrads were smarter than they were. The graduate students at Stanford talked about how the undergraduates were fragile and worried about grades. YMMV.</p>
<p>I think just the fact that some relatively larger schools HAVE a graduate department may make students feel like this. I’d take Mollie’s word for it, and second, my personal feeling is that at any good school with a strong graduate department, students are extremely lucky to be able to interact with the faculty there – instead of writing these brilliant people as “inaccessible, far-off professors,” why not go and try meeting them?</p>
<p>“The graduate students at MIT talked about how the undergrads were smarter than they were. The graduate students at Stanford talked about how the undergraduates were fragile and worried about grades.”</p>
<p>Yeah, as someone who has taught undergraduates at Stanford, I’d agree with this. I also heard stories from Stanford undergrads who came in declared as science majors but bailed into the humanities when the going got rough. A large critical mass of students intensely interested and committed to math/science/engineering exists at MIT. At Stanford? They’re here and there, but like a cube of butter in the hot sun, they melt away over time.</p>
<p>But perhaps there’s a part of you that would really like the option of dropping out of the sciences and disappearing into a large crowd of liberal arts majors. Visit both places and make your own decision.</p>
<p>I was stuck in a similar situation, and trust me its not fun. I mean, I was praying to make either institutes, but making both imposed a much harder decision. Who the hell can say no to Stanford right?</p>
<p>Well here were my evaluations:</p>
<p>MIT: Often ranked as the best engineering and sciences school in the world. Sloan is also considered the second best undergraduate business school. Hence, academically, you cant go wrong. MIT is a comparatively small school, and is fairly undergraduate based I would say. You have nobel laureates teaching Intro classes so they do place a heavy emphasis on us. Financial aid, although might not be as generous, isnt a factor for international admissions (i really like this abt MIT, and disliked Stanford’s policy on finaid for intl students). Its in a college city, you get to meet HEAPS of other students. 1 in 4 is a college student in boston. Its got great city life and social life. In fact, you would be surprised at how crazy each weekend gets here…</p>
<p>Stanford: Amazing institute, but compared to MIT only has two things going for it. Good weather and what i would say is an easier academia. </p>
<p>Decisions up to you, but I obviously chose MIT and have never regretted it/</p>
<p>I’ll weigh in here as an engineer at Stanford…</p>
<p>Well I should preface this with I was a legacy at MIT,with tip-top stats no less, who did apply to MIT and did not get in (so you could imagine my shock when I got the letter)…</p>
<p>I’d say that there is no question that Stanford has a more liberal artsiness about it (one of my dislikes when you’re forced to take IHUM) but overall I think that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. There’s more diversity of academic interest-which I think is really good. I think its exposed me to a different ways of thinking, different ways of learning so yes you do have that advantage.</p>
<p>I also think that comparing the strengths of the relative programs are futile-
A) you’re an undergrad so you should be more concerned about fit, the rankings don’t affect your experience significantly
B) they are both at the top of their game in engineering and the sciences</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen you post so far…I’d be leaning towards MIT if I were you (but I don’t really know you). However, you should visit Stanford and see if you fit in. I personally think that Stanford offers an amazing undergrad experience and you should not discount it for a second, especially on advice from people who have never been affiliated with Stanford. </p>
<p>Also, if you want truly challening courses I can point you in the way of the Math 50H series and the Physics 60 series. There’s no doubt you’ll be challenged, indeed I personally doubt you (or anyone else who has posted on this board about the “easier academia”) could finish both series freshman year…but I think you should go for it if you decide to come to Stanford. You’ll definitely get your fill of tough math and science classes. So yeah…good luck!</p>
<p>-Also, as an aside, I don’t know where people got this stereotype that undergrads were fragile-care about our grades yes (as do MIT kids do I’m sure, you won’t get into either school without caring alot about grades) but fragile, that’s got to be a joke.</p>
<p>“you won’t get into either school without caring alot about grades”</p>
<p>What I mean is that you should care more about the education you get than the grades you receive. I guess I somehow lucked out b/c I didn’t care too much about grades or SAT during HS, and still made it through. What got me in was probably my independent studies, which I pursued because I thought my HS education was lacking. Although I was had good grades, I felt inadequate because of the rather unchallenging curriculum. This kind of spirit is what I expect among fellow students in college.</p>
<p>Well, actually, I don’t think that should be so shocking when you consider the fact that MIT doesn’t really provide a legacy boost, as mollieb once explained on her blog regarding her future children’s future MIT double-legacy status and the lack of advantage that would provide. </p>
<p>MIT doesn’t consider legacy status in admissions – legacy kids aren’t at an advantage compared to the rest of the pool.</p>
<p>What MIT does seem to provide to legacies is an extra review in the admissions process:</p>
<p>Even at MIT, where we pat ourselves on the back for our meritocratic ways until our skin is raw, admissions staffers report that legacies are granted an additional review before their rejection is finalized.</p>
<p>However, to my knowledge, and which mollieb will surely confirm, nobody (at least in recent history) has ever had a rejection reversed because of that extra legacy review. Of course that begs the question of why they even run that extra review at all, and perhaps the rationale is that the admissions office wants to be fully prepared for an irate phone call from the legacy parents.</p>
<p>Congratulations on your embarassment of riches!</p>
<p>There is a huge difference between being in a ritzy California suburb and being in Cambridge MA right smack across the river from Boston. There is a significant difference between a relatively isolated, “bubble” campus, where you can wander (or run) through eucalyptus groves and golden, barren foothills, and one that is quite urban, complete with T stops. The weather is really, really different – at Stanford you can swim outside in January (although sometimes it does get a little nippy). A comprehensive university vs. a technical university with excellent but limited humanities electives. Very different housing systems (advantage MIT, I think).</p>
<p>Compared to all of that, the academic differences are pretty minor. It’s not wrong to make a decision based on non-academic factors, and money.</p>
<p>You don’t have to wait for Mollie - I can confirm it. And I’m pretty sure the rationale that you guess is in fact the correct one.</p>
<p>Based on what you’ve said, OP, I would lean toward MIT, but you really should visit the places and make up your own mind. Congrats on getting into two excellent institutions!</p>
<p>faraday, thanks for posting this thread. i am in the same boat as yours - difficult task of choosing between M and S. (a freeride at GaTech and a possible freeride at Duke thrown in the mix!). i am confused, but hey it will all be over come May 1.
I appreciate the comments of the posters, especially those of Morsmordre. i am just thinking that it may be just too intense for my comfort zone at M. Is it really true that S is so laid back? i guess the work load will be about the same (at M and S). per hasp the kind of student body might be more different.</p>
<p>I’ve found Stanford students to be as bright and talented as students I know who’ve gone to MIT. But the students that end up at Stanford, as opposed to those who end up at MIT, as often perceived by faculty as a more laid-back group. When I talk with Stanford students about why they chose to come to Stanford, I often hear someone say, “Well, I visited Yale and it was snowing and everyone was inside cracking the books, but when I came to Stanford it was sunny and people were throwing frisbees on the lawn.” That student self-selects what appears to be a more relaxed environment. However, there’s another aspect to Stanford, and one student put it this way: “We’re like ducks in a pond. Everything looks easy and placid on the surface, but in fact everyone’s paddling furiously just to stay afloat.”</p>
<p>I think that some science/engineering students also self-select Stanford to have more options if it turns out that they can’t cut the science and engineering courses. This is how I interpreted the earlier comment about the students being “fragile” – that they don’t seem to persist in the tough majors. There’s no IHTFP at Stanford. When it gets to the point that “I have truly found paradise” turns to “I hate this f*** place”, it’s just fairly simple to abandon the tough program and shift to something easier. </p>
<p>Engineering and science are difficult anywhere. “Soul crushing” is how Berkeley students used to describe the EECS department. At MIT you’ll be surrounded with a collaborative culture and critical mass of students who will persevere through hell to get the degree. At Stanford, you’ll find a much smaller group of like-minded people and perhaps the social incentives to persist are less compelling.</p>
<p>With all due respect, I’m sure you can learn a lot in Stanford’s program, but that doesn’t mean its at the level of rigor as MIT’s. And again, Stanford is a more heterogeneous group of admittees. Particularly their premed (bio/chem and chemE) majors are selected for different qualities other than raw intelligence. </p>
<p>CalAlum is convinced that MIT’s reputation for rigor above and beyond that of its peer schools is a myth. As CalAlum is a humanities professor at Stanford, I am guessing this is solely based on seeing engineering students at Stanford that look stressed out.</p>
<p>It’s not a myth. Whether the firehose is really necessary or beneficial for intellectual growth is a different matter. But rest assured that it exists.</p>
<p>@collegealum314:
No, I’m not convinced that MIT’s reputation for rigor “is a myth.” It’s just that I don’t have any hard data upon which to base the conclusion that Stanford’s science and engineering courses are any less rigorous than MIT’s.</p>
<p>I taught last year at Stanford as a guest professor; I’m now at my home institution. For what it’s worth, my daughter chose MIT over Stanford, and I believe that was an excellent choice. (Apologies to Stanford folks, but this is the MIT board after all…)</p>
<p>Faraday, while I know less about MIT’s specific policies, I am starting vaguely to see the distinction between these two schools as the difference between how much you are going to do and how much you’re forced to do. There can be no doubt that there are stars at both of these schools. </p>
<p>Now, from everything I’ve seen of your posts, and any discussion we’ve had in the past, I would agree that MIT seems to possess the overall academic mindset better fitting you. Nevertheless, perhaps the side of you that gets exposed on CC is only one side. Further, people tend to change over college at least a little, just by getting exposed to different things. Though, I don’t imagine your being the type to go out and try billions of different interesting things, given you seem like you’d not have much time, given the technical subject load you’d have of course. </p>
<p>For some, the forced rigor of a school could almost be stifling – what if you don’t WANT to take certain very tough courses, and want to take others? This is another factor. At a school like, for instance, CAltech, one no doubt has a little more stuff prescribed to do. Part of why Caltech is said to be so hard is that the rigor is more enforced. I can certainly tell you that I plan my schedule for months, change it again a week into school, and several such things, and the nice thing is I feel like I can do whatever I want. This can either be very motivating or not so much. To me, it’s very, very motivating.</p>
<p>My point is that the offerings + faculty at these schools are amazing, and while I find you seem the “MIT kind,” hidden beneath that may be a still excited physics student who doesn’t necessarily want the same kind of firehose (assuming that this poster is correct that there is a difference in how much the schools you’re considering are firehoses). To expand on collegealum314’s last words. I still lean towards MIT working better for you, and my discussion above might be more relevant if this were say, a Stanford v. Caltech discussion.</p>
And I’m pretty sure the rationale that you guess is in fact the correct one.</p>